reconsider

Motivation is basically the inner engine that drives us to set goals and move toward them. When our motivation is high, we are more driven to achieve and more ready to invest our time, energy, and emotions to reach something that feels important. When it is low, the opposite happens: goal setting itself becomes weaker, and the effort we put in naturally drops. In a workplace context, this shift is directly tied to how satisfied people are in their jobs, how happy they are at work, how well they perform, and how strongly they feel connected to the broader goals of their team or company (1) (2) . Over time, sustained low motivation and its accompanying effects can wear down both sides: the individual employee and the organization as a whole. In this blog series, we will examine workplace motivation through three major motivational theories. Instead of focusing only on how to “boost” motivation, we will explore the psychological mechanisms that shape it.  In this first article, we be...

In today’s world, almost every organization claims to value learning. And to be fair, most of them probably do recognize its importance since adapting to rapidly changing conditions and demands of today’s environment has become an absolute necessity in a competitive market.  In line with this, we see more and more companies investing in training programs, running feedback cycles, conducting performance reviews, and constantly talking about continuous improvement. But the real question is this: Do all these efforts actually make the organization more innovative, more resilient, more capable of reaching its strategic goals? Or do similar problems quietly resurface, while the same strategic miscalculations are repeated in slightly different forms? More broadly, what does it actually mean for an organization to learn? Even at the individual level, identifying the signs of learning and measuring change is already complex. When we shift to the collective level, to some...

Alexithymia, derived from the Greek roots meaning “no words for feelings,” refers to a pattern of difficulties in identifying, describing, and cognitively processing emotions . Historically, the term alexithymia was introduced by Sifneos (1970) within the context of psychosomatic and somatoform disorders, based on his collaborative clinical work with Nemiah. At that time, it was conceptualized as a dichotomous clinical variable. However, the phenomenon itself had been observed long before it was formally named. Various psychiatrists had described patients who showed marked difficulty in identifying and expressing emotions. In the mid-twentieth century, psychosomatic disorders were largely interpreted through psychoanalytic frameworks, particularly Freudian models that attributed physical symptoms to unresolved unconscious conflicts. Yet the limited and inconsistent empirical support for these explanations, along with mixed evidence regarding the effec...

Our body is constantly active. The heart beats, the lungs expand and contract, the stomach digests, and countless physiological processes unfold without deliberate control. Most of these visceral activities operate automatically. Yet automatic does not mean inaccessible. Humans are capable of sensing signals generated within their own bodies. Interoceptive awareness refers to the ability to perceive and interpret these internal bodily signals. Interoception has become an increasingly central concept across multiple domains of psychology. A substantial body of research links maladaptive interoceptive processing to negative mood states, suggesting that not only the presence of bodily signals, but the way they are interpreted, matters for psychological functioning. This insight has even contributed to the integration of interoceptive training components into certain therapeutic approaches. James–Lange Theory of Emotion ...

The relationship between personality and work performance has long attracted the attention of both employers and job seekers. Individuals often seek careers that align with their personality, assuming that fit will increase both success and satisfaction. Organizations, on the other hand, attempt to identify personality traits that may predict performance in specific roles. Yet the use of personality tests in recruitment has been consistently debated. A central concern is job relevance : whether the trait being measured is meaningfully connected to actual job requirements (Spector, 1999). Without clear evidence of this connection, personality assessment risks becoming both unfair to candidates and weak in predictive validity for organizations. The issue, therefore, is not whether personality matters. It is whether the specific trait being evaluated genuinely contributes to performance in the role in question. Despite these concerns, personality measures fr...